Bootcamps vs. College

Everyone says they don't just want warm bodies to type code, but lots and lots of places actually do just want warm bodies to type code.

Since this is what wins average-case jobs, this inevitably is what average-case products of bootcamps and universities tend to look like.

I actually had a pretty long debate with a professor friend of mine who taught me numerical analysis as an undergrad. Their whole scientific computing program has morphed into this awful mess of basically just teaching various Hadoop tool APIs and Spark. As an alum, I am in concerned.

He hates it too, and feels the students are not getting anything resembling a good education in scientific computing. But at the university's considerable career fair, where the faculty actually spend a lot of time talking to recruiters and employers, all they hear is we want more people who already know framework X, library Y, etc. They don't care if you even know what LU decomposition is, what issues there are using power method for eigenvalues, let alone anything about the actual hardware specification for basic numerical types and issues with precision. I mean, they don't even care if you have the slightest fluency or naive understanding of that stuff. Literally zero understanding is fine, as long as you have memorized sections of certain APIs that they use and you will not complain if your job is drudgery related to rote usage of those APIs.

Since this is what wins jobs, it's what they teach.

I do agree with you that CS degrees are very valuable, though it seems like you are saying that they are important because they teach problem solving and abstract thinking - but aren't there many ways to obtain those types of skills?

I feel like a common theme on this comment page is that bootcamp people are trained to do XY - therefore they cannot do Z or learn Z quickly. People who are actually into computers will learn all the other computery stuff on their own. Things like compilers, how RAM works, heaps, stacks, sorts, networking, security, etc. Just because you are only taught how to make a CRUD app with modular principles doesn't mean your learning will stop there...

I guess this argument is very personal for me because I came into programming without a CS degree. I taught myself all the fancy tech guy dick swinging bullshit by myself by guess what - wait for it - ordering CS books on amazon.com and learning this shit myself. It's not that hard. Anyone who is capable of abstract thought and has a little bit money and time can learn all this CS stuff on their own.

People with the academia mindset of thinking they know so much more than everybody else are doing themselves a disservice. This line of thought will only lead to boxing yourself in because you have only been taught to do things like a horse that has been broken to run races. I personally think people who have experienced hardships and not had the silver CS spoon in their mouth make much more well rounded programmers than the typical CS dick waving upper middle class white guy that seems to be so pervasive in all the companies I have worked for.

What, they bred the capacity for abstract thought into you in college?

College attracts a generally higher quality applicant pool. You're mistaking selection bias for an effect.

Let me tell you, I've interviewed programmers from all over. There are boatloads of people with CS degrees with close to zero capacity for creative thinking. There are also boatloads of CS grads who can barely code their way out of a while loop (true story!).

I've spent my career (no CS degree!) working alongside CS grads. I've gone further, faster, than most of them. I've had to deal with this kind of idiotic commentary over and over again.

CS grads are always surprised that I never got a degree (oh, I never would have guessed! you're different, its those OTHER people without degrees who are idiots). Four years of school + the associated debt creates a big incentive to believe that you got a square deal out of college.